1885 Watch Tower - A2Z.org

How then doth David in spirit [i.e., by inspiration] call him Lord,saying, The Lord [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Master or Ruler] Sitthou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool,--IfDavid then call him Lord, how is he his son?" Matt. 22:42-45.Some of our day, like the Pharisees of old, too indolent and tooindifferent to search, are not able to answer this question, and areprovoked by having such questions asked--and they are not slow tobrand such as "controversial and unprofitable questions." But let itbe remembered that the Lord himself asked this question, andimplied that in such an appreciation of the subject as would enableus to answer it lay a key to a clearer appreciation of himself and hismission. Therefore let us examine this important and profitablequestion and obtain the key and the knowledge therefrom.We find two general views relative to Jesus: one seems to reject hisLordshipR809 : page 3entirely and considers him only as David's son and Joseph's son.Another class goes to an opposite extreme, and whileacknowledging the Messiah as David's Lord, or Ruler, theyvirtually deny that he is David's son. They claim that the Messiahwas a mixture of the divine and human natures, in fact that he was amixture of three distinct persons in one person, and that because ofthis mixture of natures, he could be and was, at one and the sametime both David's son and David's Lord. And their wonderfulwisdom and faith (?) goes still further and claims that by virtue ofthis mixture he was both his own son and his own Father and Lord.A right exercise of reason fails to discern in this absurdity anyanswer to Jesus' question,--How could David's Son be his Lord?Such an absurdity is nowhere taught in the Scriptures and nowhereillustrated in nature. Two natures cannot mix except to produce animperfect thing. Such a ludicrous absurdity even the Phariseeswould have been ashamed to advance, and they took the moresensible course of holding their peace and asking no morequestions.But so strong is the faith (?) of the nominal Church on this point,that like the Pharisees of old, they would not dare to ask Jesus andthe Apostles to explain how this could be, fearing that they mightmake manifest the absurdity of their traditions by a clearpresentation of the truth. This theory virtually denies that Christshould be or was the Son of David, and implies that he onlypretended to be such. They claim that he was not really a manduring his earthly career of 33 years, but all that time was really aspiritual being, who merely went about in human form, appearingto be and pretending to be a man, but not actually such. Dare anythus charge him in whose mouth was found no guile? Both of theseclasses of theorists should carefully note that the Scriptures assertboth things of Jesus. He must be both David's Son and David'sLord. He must be both the stem or branch out of David's roots, and